^J 


%. 


s^. 


%^, 


p. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/. 


:/. 


^ 


^ 


m. 


V, 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


-Has 

|50     ""'^^ 


IM 


1.4 


IIM 

2.2 
1= 

1.6 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


« 


-^•\ 


€^ 


^ 


\ 


% 


V 


o^ 


33  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  )4580 

(716)  872-4503 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  canadien  de  microreproductions  historiques 


V 


Technicat  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 


0 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couvertura  de  couleur 


I      I    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommag^e 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^e  et/ou  pelliculia 


□    Cover  title  missing/ 


.0  titre  de  couverture  manque 


□    Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  giographiques  en  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

r~n    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  an  couleur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reiii  avec  d'autres  documents 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serree  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  Je  la  marge  interieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajouties 
lors  dune  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  ixait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  iti  film^es. 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6ti  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m^thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessous. 


□    Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 

r~~]    Pages  damaged/ 


D 


Pages  endommagees 


Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul^es 


r~71    Pages  discoloured,  stcained  or  foxed/ 


Pages  ddcolor^es,  tacheties  ou  piqu^es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachees 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualit^^  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materi{ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

idition  available/ 
Edition  disponible 


I      I  Pages  detached/ 

r~7  Showthrough/ 

I      I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

r~~l  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

□    Only  edition  available/ 
Seule 


D 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  cnt  itd  film^es  d  nouveau  de  facon  ^ 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplimentaires; 


Wrinkled  pages  may  film  slightly  out  of  focus. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmi  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqud  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


/ 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

National  Library  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grflce  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Bibliothdque  nationale  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  conoition  et 
de  la  nottetd  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  ci'  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimde  sont  filmds  en  commen^ant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6»  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  :iui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED "),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaltra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  —^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diff6rents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichd,  il  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

^x^<^^^^ 


2. 


LETTER 


10  THE 


HON.  HARRISON  GRAY  OTIS, 


A  MEMBER  OF  THE  SENATE  OF  MASSACHUSETTS, 


OX  THE 


PRESENT   STATE  OF  OUR   NATIONAL  AFFAIRS  ; 


WITH  IREMAMKS 


UPON 


MR.  PICK  TURING'S  LETTER 


TO  THE 


GOVERNOR  OF  THE  COMMONWEALTH. 


BY  JOHN  QUINCY  ADAMa 


♦ 


BOSTON : 

eUBLISHED  BY  OLITEB  AMD  MUNROE. 


1808, 


r 


,i  i; 


LETTER 


TO  Till 


HON.  HARRISON  GRAY  OTIS. 


Dear  Sir, 


WASHINGTON,  MARCH  31,   1808, 


I  HAVE  received  from  one  of  my  friends  in 
Boston  a  copy  of  a  printed  pamphlet,  containing  a  let- 
ter from  Mr.  Pickering  to  the  Governor  of  the  Com- 
monwealth,  intended  for  communication  to  the  Leff- 
islature  of  the  State,  during   their  Session,   recently 
concluded.     But  this  object  not  having  been  accom- 
plisl  cd ,  It  appears  to  have  been  published  by  some  friend 
of  the  writer,  whose  inducement  is  stated,   no  doubt 
truly,  to  have  been  the  importance  of  the  matter  dis- 
cussed in  it,  and  the  high  respectabilitv  of  the  author. 
1  he  subjects  of  this  letter  are  the  ii.mbargo,  and  tht 
difterenccs  in  controversy  between  our   Country  and 
Oreat-Britain— -Subjects  upon  which  it  is  my  misfor- 
tune, in  the  discharge  of  my  duties  as  a  Senator  of  the 
United  States  to  differ  from  the  opinions  of  my   CeU- 
league.     The  place  where  the  question  upon  the  first 
ot  them,  in  common  with  others  of  great  national  con- 
cern, was  between  him  and  me,  in  our  official  capacities 
a  proper  object  of  discussion,  was  the   Senate  of  the 
Union— X here,  it  was  discussed,  and,  as  far  as  tht^ 
constitutional  authority  of  that  body  extended,  there  it 
was  decided— Having  obtained  alike  the  concurrence  of 
the  other  branch  of  the  national  Legislature,  and  the  ap. 
probation  of  the  President,  it  became  the  Law  of  the 
Land,  and  as  such  I  have  considered  it  ^ititled  tn  Lh*» 
respect  and  obedience  of  every  virtuous  citizen. 

i^rom  these  decisions  however,  the  letter  in  ques- 
tion  is  to  be  considered  in  the  nature  of  an  appeal ;  in 
the  hrst  instance,  to  our  common  constituents,  the 
Legislature  of  the  State— and  in  tlie  second,  by  the 


pub  ication,  to  the  people.  To  both  these  tribunals  I 
snail  always  hold  myself  accountable  for  every  act  of 
my  public  life.  Yet,  were  my  own  political  character 
alone  implicated  in  the  course  which  has  in  this  in- 
stance been  pursued,  I  should  have  forborne  all  notice 
of  the  proceeding,  and  have  left  my  conduct  in  this  a<5 
in  other  cases,  to  the  candour  and  discretion  of  mv 
Country.  ^ 

But  to  this  species  of  appeal,  thus  conducted,  there 
are  some  objections  on  Constitutional  grounds,  which 
1  deem  It  my  duty  to  mention  for  the  consideration  of 
the  public.     On  a  statement  of  circumstances  attend- 
ing a  very  important  act  of  national  legislation,  a  state- 
ment  which  the  writer   undoubtedly  "believed   to  be 
true,  but  which   comes    only   from' one   side   of  the 
question  and  VN'hich,  I  expect  to  prove  in  the  most  es- 
sential  points  erroneotis,  the  writer  with  the  most  an- 
imated  tone  of  energy  calls  for  the  interposition  of  the 
commercial  States,   and   asserts  that    ''  nothing   but 
their  sense,  clearly  and  emphatically   expressed;  will 
save  them  from   ruin."     This  solemn   and  alarmino; 
invocation  is  addressed  to  the  Legis^lature  of  Massa! 
chusetts,  at  so  late  a  period  of  their  Session,  that  had 
it  been  received  by  them,  they  must  have  been  com- 
pelled  either  to  act  upon  the  views  of  this  representa- 
tion,  without  hearing  the   counter   statement  of  the 
other  side,  or  seemingly  to  disregard  the  pressing  in. 
terest  of  their  constituents,  by  neglecting  an  admoni- 
tion  ot  the  most   serious   complexion.     Considerhiff 
the  application  as  a  precedent,  its  tendency  is  daneer- 
ous  to  the  public.     For  on  the  first  supposition,   that 
tlie  Legislature  had  been  precipitated  to  act   on    the 
spurofsuch  an  instigation,  they  must  have  acted  on 
imperfect  information,  and  under  an   excitement,   not 
remarkably  adapted  to  the  composure  of  safe  delibera- 
tion.     On  the  second  they  would  have  been  exposed 
to  unjust  imputations,  which  at  the  eve  of  an  .election 
.-.gx.wittv..  upciULca  in  tne  most  inequitable  manner 
upon  the  characters  of  individual  members. 

The  interposition  of  one  or  more  State  Legislatures, 
to  controul   the   exercise  of  the   powers   vested  by 


the  general  Constitution  in  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States^  is  at  least  of  questionable  policy.  The  views 
of  a  State  Legislature  are  naturally  and  properly  lim- 
ited in  a  considerable  degree  to  the  particular  inter- 
ests of  the  State.  The  very  object  and  formation  of 
the  National  deliberative  assemblies  was  for  the  com- 
promise and  conciliation  of  the  interests  of  all — of  the 
whole  nation.  If  the  appeal  from  the  regular,  legiti- 
mate  measures  of  the  body  where  the  whole  nation  is 
represented,  be  proper  to  one  State  Legislature,  it 
must  be  so  to  another.  If  the  commercial  States  are 
called  to  interpose  on  one  hand,  will  not  the  agricul- 
tural States  loe  with  equal  propriety  summoned  to  in- 
terpose on  the  other  ?  If  the  East  is  stimulated  against 
the  West,  and  the  Northern  and  Southern  Sections 
are  urged  into  collision  with  each  other,    by  appeals 

from  the  acts  of  Congress  to  the  respective  States 

in  what  are  these  appeals  to  end? 

It  is  undoubtedly  the  right,  and  may  often  become 
the  duty  of  a  State  Legislature,  to  address  that  of  the 
Nation,  with  the  expression  of  its  wishes,  in  regard  to 
interests  peculiarly  concerning  the  State  itself.  Nor 
shall  I  question  the  right  of  every  member  of  the  great 
federative  compact  to  declare  its  own  sense  of  me? 
ures  interesting  to  the  nation  at  large.  But  whenever 
the  case  occurs  that  this  sense  should  be  *'  clearly  and 
emphatically"  expressed,  it  ought  surely  to  be  predi- 
cated upon  a  full  and  impartial  consideration  of  the 
whole  subject— not  under  the  stimulus  of  a  one  sided 
representation — for  less  upon  the  impulse  of  conjec- 
tures and  suspicions.  It  is  not  through  the  medium 
of  personal  sensibility,  nor  of  partv  bias,  nor  of  pro- 
fessional  occupation,  nor  of  geographical  position,  that 
the  hiikole  Truth  can  be  discerned,  of  questions  in- 
volving the  rights  and  interests  of  this  extensive  Union. 
When  their  discussion  is  urged  upon  a  State  Legisla- 
ture, the  first  call  unon  its  membf^rs  sho"!'"'  be  *—  '"•5'-♦• 
all  their  feelings  and  interests  as  the  Citizens  of  a  sin-' 
gle  State  into  the  commoji  Stock  of  the  National  con- 
cern. 

Should  the  Dccurrcnc?   upon    which  an  appeal  is 


li 


S.e's"tcbt';r"''  °'  ^'  ^'"'°"'  ">  '1-  of  a 

the   State  had  bee  •  TVl^"^  ^  representation  of 

found  himself  in  .hr.-"^"*?^'  *"^  *^  ""e-nber  who 

■  «f  duty  to  invoketeTnT""^-'  •'^="  '"'P^"<=<>  ''r  "  «'«» 

pared  to  exhibif  h^T  vi  wTo  th?' .' •"  '"'«''*  "^  P'^ 
the  difference  of  oph.iJ^^Z,?  tl  '  i""'  "P°"  ''^'"'^ 
that  the  resort  sho^^rfhiV  J  *»•=«"?'»«;  or  at  least 
would  leave  h  within^' ^^^  of  time  as 

t^present^Ifons  to  h.  ^^  •"'>  "^  Possibility  for  his 
Constituens    before, h''""'=?J,'^y   *"^  '^"'""•on 

eeeSinVmus?b:"sLrP""^°^  ^'"''  '=°»«^  °f  re- 
ceive olThe  proprietv  of"""'  *"!.'' '' '''""'"  '°  «>»- 
another  inconveE..-"^  "     ^ct  it  presents 

fit)m  th!r«r?J™    r    ''''"'^''  •"">*'  necessarily  result 

-^ht:d5^t3?--"=^^ 

of  the  mai'  T^"".  *°  ''"'^. '"'  *^"  »  denunciation 
ed  musXl  Wmself'^:''"'  «?  a  policy  thus  reprobat. 
self-defence  to  vIh-  t"™"""""*  ^^  ^""y  "o'ive  of 
eral  sense  of  hi,  n^?  •  ,'J"'. '=°"*'^'  =  ""^  'f  his  gen. 

mdusSs^detrifn":  hu'whTl-  "'""T  •°  *^ 
business  of  the  Se«inn   .      i  *',"?^  '°  *''«  P"blic 

fo«.ed  to  empty  frhis*;^r,-f'?'  '"=  ™'g'>'  l^' 
course  be  deducted  frnmT    J"'",'''^''''"".    would  of 

regular  and  apXt'eTunctus^'^lfouM  "it  """^ 
cas.onsfrecpKicIy'^recur  tTe?"o„M^l"'£,'L'=^.^°'=- 
JCTC  With  the  f]ii#:.  n.«^r     '         -     VT"*  ""'^  ^'*"  *■"  i»i€r- 

Nor  can  itr^^to  rarr.le1e' H  P""'^ 
tagonizin?  ipppVi    ,^  j^-  .         ,    tendency  of  such  an- 

i«  its  ow  f  Sat  ° ''T1  *'''  ^°.""<="=  °f  'he  State 
legislature,  to  destroy  its  influence,  and 


expose  It  to  dcnsion,  in  the  presence  of  its  sister  States, 
and  to  produce  between  the  colleagues  themselves 
mutual  asperities  and  rancours,  until  the  great  con, 
cerns  of  the  nation  would  degenerate  into  the  puni 
controversies  of  personal  altercation.  " 

It  is  therefore  with  extreme  reluctance  that  I  enter 
upon  this  discussion.  In  developing  my  own  views 
and   the  principles   which  have  ^govern^d   my  con! 

fo"tL'V    k'"*"  '"^  °"'  ^°''^S«  affairs,  and  particularly 
to  the  Embargo,  some  very   material  differences  in 
point  of  fact  as  well  as  of  opinion,  will  be  foqnd  be. 
tween   my  statements,  and  those  of  the  letter,  which 
alone  can  apologize  for  this.     They  will  not,  I  trust, 
be  deemed  m  any  degree  disrespectful  to  the  writer. 
Far  more  pleasing  would  it  have  been  to  me,  could 
that  honest  and  anxious  pursuit  of  the  policy  best  cal- 
culated to  promote  the  Honour  and  welfare  of  our 
Country,  which,  I  trust,  is  felt  with  equal  ardour  by 
us  both    have  resulted  in  the  same  opinions,  and  have 
given  them  the  vigour  of  united  exertion.     There  is 
a  candour  and  liberality  of  conduct  and  of  semiment 
due  from  associates  in  the   same  public  charge,  to- 
wards  each  other,  necessary  to  their  individual  repu- 
ation    to  their  common  influence,  and  to  their  public 
usefulness.     In  our  republican  Government,  where 
the  power  of  the  nation  consists  alone  in  the  sympa. 
thiesof  opinion    this  reciprocal  deference,  this  open 
hearted  imputation  of  hon^  ^  intentions,  is  the  only 
adamant  at  once  attractive  .nd  impenetrable,  that  can 
Nar,  unshattercd,  all  the  thunder  of  foreign  hostility 
Ever  since  I  have  had  the  honour  of  a  Lat  in   thL 
mfnT^P  £°""^*^«'  I  '^^ve  extended  it  to  every  depart- 
mcnt  of  the  Government.     However  differing  in  mv 
conclusions    upon  questions  of  the  highest  moment, 
from  any  other  man,  of  whatever  party,  I  have  never 
t".^     ^"/P{?»°">    'fPuted  his   conduct    to  corrupJ 
m.n*o  j^  ^^^\«.  confidence  argues  ignorance  of  pubfiq 
men  and  pubhc  affairs,  to  that  ignorance  I  must  plead 
pilty.     I  know,  mdeed  enough  of  h.im«n  n...*.!;?  ' 

Slf  ^'  '^''  vigilant  observation  isTt'airiimcs! 
and  that  suspicion  may  occasionally  become  ijccQsgar^J 


upon  the  conduct  of  men  in  noner      R..f  r  i 

government — Election  is  the  verv  test  of  r«nnn^»„ 
and  n,  periodical  return  i.  tl^^^nltiu.  b !f  .'i:;! 
uponns  abuse  ;  of  which  the  elector,,  must  of  course 
be  the  sole  judges.    For  the  exercise  of  |,ower  where 
man  IS  free,  confidence  is  indispc„sable_a,H  "hl^ 
1   once  totally  fails-when  the  men  to  whom   he  pco 
pie  have  commuted  the  application  of  their  force,  (ot 
their  benefit,  are  to  be  presumed  the  vilest  of  man 
brisoLd""'  foundation  of  the  social  compact  mu  J 
be  dissolved       Towards  the  Gentleman  whose  official 
Station  results  from  the  confidence  of  tl-.e  same  UgU. 
ature,  by  whose  appointment  I  have  the  hono^?  of 

peculiarly  due  from  me,  nor  should  I  now  notice  his 
letter,  notwuhstanding  the  disapprobation  it  so  obv  ! 
ous  y  implies  at  the  course  which  I  have  pursuedYn 
relation  to  che  subjects  of  which  it  treats,  ^Tno" 
ai>pear  to  me  calculated  to  produce  upo^  the  puNk 

S  ;7thr„Xir '"°""''^  '°  '""^  "^"^^^  -"  '"- 
Having  understood  that  a  motion  in  the  Senate  of 
Massachusetts  was  made  by  you,  requesting  the  Gov 
ernorto  transmit  Mr.  Pickering's  letter  to  Ae  Lerf,' 

o  rA,- "^ff'?""  "''^"^"^  cotSmunications,  relatf^g 
to  public  affairs,  as  he  might  have  received  from  me 
I  avail  myself  of  that  circumstance,  and  of  the  friend! 
ship  which  has  so  long  subsisted  between  us    to  take 

itat ion    f  °^  addressing  this  letter,  intended'for  pub! 
lication    to  you.     Very  few  of  the  facts  which  1  shall 
^ate  will  rest  upon  information  peculiar  to  my  e  f - 
Most  of  them   will  stand  upon  the  basis  of  official 
documents,  or  of  public  and  undisputed  notoriety 
for  my  opinions,  though  fully  persuaded,  that   even 
where  differing  from  your  own,  they  will  meet  wwf" 
tair  and  libera!  judge  in  you,  yet  of  the  public  I  ask 
neither  favour  nor  indulgence.     PretendiL  to  no  ex- 
traordmary   credit  from  the  authority  of  thi  writer    I 

steiiH^hvT  ""^  '"''''  '''V^>'  "'^*'  ^^'^  weakness,  or 
stand  by  then'  own  strength. 


^t' 


9 

The  first  rr mark  which  obtrudes  itself  upon  the 
mind,  on  the  perusal  of  Mr.  Pickering's  letter  is  that 
in  enumerating  all  the  ;,r<?/f«w  (for  he  thinks  there 
are  no  causes)  for  the  Embargo,  and  for  a  War  with 
Oreat  Britain,  he  has  totaUy  omitted  the  British  or- 
ders  of  Council  of  November  11,  1807,  those  or- 
ders,  under  which  millions  of  the  property  of  our 
fellow  citizens,  are  now  detained  in  British  hands,  or 

w^h-  hf  "^m""  ^'''''^   ^^P'^'*^'  ^^°^^   °^dc  s,  under 
which  tenfold  as  many  millions  of  the  same  property 

wou  d  have  been  at  this  moment  in  the  same  predica- 
ment,  had  they  not  been  saved  from  exposure  to  it  by 
t^ie  Embargo,  those  orders,  which  if  once  submitted  to 
and  carried  to  the  extent  of  their  principles,  would  not 
have  le  tan  inch  of  American  canvass  upon  the  ocean, 
but  under  British  licence  and  British  taxation.  An 
attentive  reader  of  the  letter,  without  other  informa- 
tion,  would  not  even  suspect  their  existence.     Ther 

tZn'f  '"^  T^  T  ^'^"^  P^««^g^s»  faintly,  and  darkly 
alluded  to  under  the  justifying  description  of  -  thi 
on^rs  of  the  British  Government,  retaliating  the 
French  imperial  decree  :"  but  as  causes  for  the  Em- 

with  rr^L'R^?'''^^^'''"'^'  ^'  even^m.;i.«  of  War 
with  Great  Britain,  they  are  not  only  unnoticed,  but 
their  very  existence  is  oy  direct  implication  denied. 

It  IS  indeed  true,  that  these  orders  were  not  official- 
ly  communicated  with  the  President's  Message  re- 
commendmg  the  Embargo.  They  had  not  been  offi. 
cially  received-But  they  were  announced  in  several 
paragraphs  from  London  and  Liverpool  Newspapers 
of  the  10th  1  ith  and  12th  of  November,  wwKp 
peared  m  the  National  Intelligencer  of  I8th  Decern. 
ber,  the  day  upon  which  the  Embargo  Message  was 

Tare  thu  thf^?'  T^  ^''t""  ^-"nt  KaLn 
care  that  they  should  not  be  authentically  known  be- 
fore  their  time~for  the  very  same  newspapers  whieh 
gave  this  inofficial  notice  of  these  orders^  announced 
Sr^fe^/.^.l^'--  «--:  "Pon  a'special  m'i^r 

the.V^irZ  """•""  '^•''''^^-  ^""^  ^^  "^w  ^now  that  of 
these  all-devounng  instruments  of  rapine    Mr    Rose 

WHS  not  even  informcd^-His  m.^Z^Z'p^l;,^^ 


16 


a  tnission  of  conciliation  and  reparation  for  a  flagrant 
—enormous — acknowledged  outrage. — But  he  was 
not  sent  with  these  orders  of  Council  in  his  hands. — 
His  text,  was  the  disavowal  of  Admiral  Berkley's 
conduct — The  Commentary  was  to  be  discovered  on 
another  page  of  the  British  ministerial  policy — On  the 
fece  of  Mr.  Rose's  instructions,  these  orders  of  Coun- 
cil were  as  invisible,  as  they  are  on  that  of  Mr.  Pick- 
cring's  letter. 

They  were  not  merely  without  official  authenticity. 
Rumours  had  for  several  weeks  been  in  circulation, 
derived  from  English  prints,  and  from  private  corres- 
pondences, that  such  orders  were  lo  issue  :  and  no 
inconsiderfible  pains  w^re  taken  here  to  discredit  the 
fact.  Assurances  were  given  that  there  was  reason 
to  believe  no  such  orders  to  be  contemplated.  Suspi- 
cion was  lulled  by  declarations  equivalent  nearly  to  a 
positive  denial  :  and  these  opiates  were  continued  for 
weeks  after  the  Embargo  was  laid,  until  Mr.  Erskine. 
received  instructions  to  make  the  official  communica- 
tion of  the  orders  themselves,  in  tlieir  proper  shape, 
to  our  Government.  . 

•  Yet,  although  thus  unauthenticated,  and  even  al- 
though thus  in  some  sort  denied,  the  probability  of 
the.circuraaiances  wnder  which  they  were  announced, 
alid  the  twceping  tendency  of  their  effects,  formed  to 
my  understanding  a  powerful  motive,  and  together 
with  tlie  papers  sent  by  the  Prcsidentj  and  his  express 
iccommcncktion,  a  decisive  one,  for  assenting  to  the 
Embargo.,  As  a  precautionary  measure,  I  believed  it 
would  rescue  an  immense  property  from  depredation, 
if  the  oaders  should  prove  autheiitic.  If  the  alarm 
wa)»  groundless,  it  must  very  soon  be  disproved,  and 
the  Embargo  might  be  removed  with  the  danger. 

The  omission  of  all  notice  of  these  facts  in  the  pres- 
sing enquiries  *'  why  the  Embargo  was  laid  ?"  is  the 
more  surprising,  because  tliey  aie  of  all  the  facts,  the 
most  material,  upon  a  fwr  and  impartial  examination 
of  the  expediency  ot  tliat  Act,  when  It  passed — And 
because  these  orders,  together  with  t)ie  subsequent 
**  retaliating  decrees  of  France  and  Spain,  have  fur- 


iiished  the  only  reasons  upon  which  I  have  acquiessed 
in  its  continuance  to  this  day.  If  duly  weighed,  they 
will  save  us  the  trouble  of  resorting  to  jealousies  cif 
secret  corruption,  and  the  imaginary  terrors  of  Napo- 
lean  for  the  real  cause  of  the  Embargo.  These  are 
fictione  of  foreign  invention— The  French  Emperor 
had  not  declared  that  he  would  have  no  neutrals— He 
had  /lor  required  that  our  ports  should  be  shut  against 
British  Commerce— but  the  orders  of  Council  if  sub- 
mitted to  would  have  degraded  us  to  the  condition  of 
Colonies.  If  resisted  would  have  fattened  the  wolves 
ot  plunder  with  our  spoils.  The  Embargo  was  the 
only  shelter  from  the  Tempest— The  last  refuse  of 
our  violated  Peace. 

I  have  indeed  been  myself  ox  opinion  that  the  Em. 
bargo,  must  in  its  nature  be  a  temporary  expedient, 
and  that  preparations  manifesting  a  determination  of 
resistance  against  these  outrageous  violations  of  our 
neutral  riglits  ought  at  least  to  have  been  made  a  sub- 
ject  of  serious  deliberation  in  Congress,  I  have  be- 
lieved and  do  still  believe  that  our  internal  resources 
are  competent  to  the  establishment  and  maintainance 
ot  a  naval  force  public  and  private,  if  not  fully  ade- 
quate to  the  protection  and  defence  of  our  Commerce, 
at  least  sufficient  to  induce  a  retreat  from  these  hostil- 
ities and  to  deter  from  a  renewal  of  them,  by  either  of 
the  warring  parties  ;  and  that  a  system  to  that  effect 
might  be  formed,  ultimately  far  more  economical,  and 
certainly  more  energetic  than  a  three  y-ears  Embariro. 
Very  soon  after  the  closure  of  our  Ports,  I  did  sSb- 
mit  to  the  consideration  of  the  Senate,  a  proposition 
for  the  appointment  of  a  comittee  to  institute  an  en- 
quiry to  this  end.  But  my  resolution  met  noeiicour- 
apjement.  Attempts  of  a  similar  nature  have  been 
made  m  the  House  of  Representatives,  but  laavc  been 
equally  discountenanced,  and  from  these  detemiina- 

sufhciendy  confident  in  the  superiority  of  my  own 
Wisdom  to  ap[>cafl,  by  a  topical  application  to  the  con- 
genial  feelings  of  any  one— not  even  of  my  own  native 
Section  of  the  Union. 


12 


r 


If 


n 


The  Embargo,  however,  is  a  restriction  always  un- 
der our  own  controul.    It  was  a  measure  altogether  of 
defence,  and  of  experiment — If  it  was  injudiciously  or 
ovcr-hastily  laid,  it  has  been  every  day  since  its  adop- 
tion open  to  a  repeal  :  if  it    should  prove  ineffectual 
for  the  purposes  which  it  was  meant  to  secure,  a  sin- 
gle day  will  suffice  to  unbar  the   doors.     Still  believ- 
ing it  a  measure  justified  by  the  circumstances  of  the 
time,  I  am  ready   to  admit  that  those  who  thought 
otherwise  may  have  had  a  wiser  foresight  of  events, 
and  a  sounder  judgment  of  the  then  existing  state  of 
things  than  the  majority  of  the   National   Legislature^ 
and  the  President.     It  has  been  approved  by   several 
of  the  State  Legislatures,  and  among  the  rest  by  our 
own.     Yet  of  all  its  effects  we  are  still  unable  to  judge 
with  certainty.     It  must  still  abide  the  test  of  futuri- 
ty.    I  shall  add  thteit  there  were  other  motives  which 
had  their  operation  in  contributing  to  the  passage   of 
the  act,  unnoticed  by  Mr.  Pickering,  and  which  hav- 
ing now  ceased  will  also  be  left  unnoticed  by  me. 
The  orders  of  Council  of  11th  Nov.  still  subsist  in  all 
their  force ;  and  are  now  confirmed,  with  the  addition 
of  taxation^  by  act  of  Parliament. 

As  they  stand  in  front  of  the  real  causes  for  the 
Embargo,  so  they  are  entitled  to  the  same  pre-emi- 
nence in  enumerating  the  causes  of  hostili,ty,  which 
the  British  Ministers  are  accumulating  upon  our  for- 
bearance. They  strike  at  the  root  of  our  independence. 
They  assume  the  principle  that  we  shall  have  no  com- 
merce in  time  of  war,  but  with  her  dominions,  and  as 
tributaries  to  her.  The  exclusive  confinement  of 
commerce  to  the  mother  country,  is  the  great  princi- 
ple of  the  modern  colonial  system  ;  and  should  we  by 
a  dereliction  of  our  rights  at  this  momentous  stride  of 
encroachment  surrender  our  commercial  freedom  with- 
out a  struggle,  Britain  has  but  a  single  step  more  to 
take,  and  she  brings  us  back  to  the  stamp  act  and  the 
tea  tax. 

Yet  these  orders — thus  fatal  to  the  liberties  for 
which  the  sages  and  heroes  of  our  revolution  toiled 
and  bled — thus  studiously  concealed  until  the  mo- 


13 

ment  when  they  bu.st  upon  our  heads— thus  issued 
at  the  very  instant  when  a  mission  of  atonement  was 
professedly  sent—in  these  orders  we  are  to  see  no- 
thing  but  a  ♦'  retaliating  order  upon  France  "—la 
these  orders,  we  must  not  find  so  much  as  a  cause— 
BrLIin^  ^^  "^"^^^  ^s  a  pretence,  for  complaint  against 

To  my  mind,  Sir,  in  comparison  with  those  orders, 
the  three  causes  to  which  Mr.  Pickering  explicitly  li- 
mits  our  grounds  for  a  rupture  with  England,  might 
indeed  be  justly  denominated  pretenccs^m  compS^i- 
i*on  with  them,  former  aggressions  sink  into  insiff- 
nificance.  To  argue  upon  the  subject  of  our  disputes 
with  Britain,  or  upon  the  motives  for  the  Embargo 
and  keep  them  out  of  sight,  is  like  laying  your  finger 
over  the  unit  before  a  series  of  noughlts,  and  then 
i»-nthmetically  proving  that  tiiey  all  amount  to  nothing. 

It  IS  not  however  in  a  mere  omission,  nor  yet  in  the 
history  of  the  Embargo,  that  the  inaccuracies  of  the 
statement  I  am  examining  have  given  me  the  most 
serious  concern— it  is  in  the  view  taken  of  the  ques- 
tions  in  controversy  bet\i^een  us  and  Britain.  The 
wisdom  of  the  Embargo  is  a  question  of  great,  but 
ransient  magnitude,  and  omission  sacrifices  ni  na- 
lonal  right.     Mr.  Pickering's  object  was  to  dissuade 

^„!n^'  '!fi'°"i^'^.^'  ""."^  ^"S^^"^'  i"to  which  he 
suspected  the  administration  was  plunging  us,  under 
Freiich  compulsion.     But  the  ten^denc^y  o^f  hi.  pam' 
phlet  IS  to  reconcile  the  nation,  or  at  least  the  com- 
mercial  States,  to  the  servitude  of  British  protection, 
and  war  with  all  the  rest  of  Europe.     Hence  England 
of  T'k  "!,  "^  ^l  contending  for  the  common  liberties 
01  mankind,  and  our  only  safeguard  against  the  ambi- 
ton  and  injustice  of  France.     Hence  all  our  sensibil  . 
ties  are  invoked  m  her  favour,  and  all  our  antipathies 
against  her  antagonist.     Hence  too  all  the  sub^e^s  of 

„.,  „.._"". ■""  "°  """  •"'"■""'  are  aijcUirwi  to  be 

on  our  part  mere  pmences,  of  which  the  rhht  is  une- 
quivocally  pronounced  to  b'  on  her  side.  ProceedTng 
from  a  Senator  of  the  United  States,  specially  ctareed 
as  a  member  of  ihe  executive  with  the  mahUenance 


u 


II 


of  the  nation's  rights,  against  foreign  powers,  and  at 
a  moment  extremely  critical  of  pending  negotiation 
upon  ail  the  points  thus  dcncated,  this  formal  aban- 
4ionment  of  the  American  cause,  this  summons  of  un- 
conditional surrender  to  the  pretensions  of  our  anta- 
gonist, is  in  my  mind  highly  alarming.  It  becomes 
therefore  a  duty  to  which  every  other  consideration 
must  yield  to  point  out  the  errors  of  this  representa- 
tion. Before  we  strike  the  standard  of  the  nation,  let 
us  at  least  examine  the  purport  of  the  summons. 

And  first,  with  respect  to  the  impressment  of  our 
seamen.  We  are  told  that  "  the  taking  of  British  sea- 
men  found  on  board  our  merchant  vessels,  by  British 
ships  of  war,  is  agreeably  to  a  right,  claimed  and  ex- 
ercised for  ages."  It  is  obvious  that  this  claim  and 
exercise  of  ages,  could  not  apply  to  us,  as  an  indepen- 
dent people.  If  the  right  was  claimed  and  exercised 
while  our  vessels  were  navigating  under  the  British 
flag,  it  could  not  authorize  the  same  claim  when  their 
owners  have  become  the  citizens  of  a  sovereign  state. 
As  a  relict  of  colonial  servitude,  whatever  may  be  the 
claim  of  Great  Britain,  it  surely  can  be  no  ground  for 
contending  that  it  is  entitled  to  our  submission. 

If  it  be  meant  that  the  right  has  been  claimed  and 
exercised  for  ages  over  the  merchant  vessels  of  other 
nations,  I  apprehend  it  is  a  mistake.  The  case  never 
occurred  with  sufficient  freiquency  to  constitute  even 
a  practice,  much  less  a  right.  If  it  had  been  either,  it 
would  have  been  noticed  by  some  of  the  writers  on 
the  laws  of  nations.  The  truth  is,  the  question  arose 
out  of  American  Independence — from  the  severance 
of  one  nation  into  two.  It  was  never  made  a  question 
between  any  other  nations.  There  is  therefore  no 
right  of  prescription. 

But,  it  seem-i,  it  has  also  been  clamed  and  exercised, 
during  the  whole  of  the  three  Administrations  of  our 

njitinnal  Crnv^prnrnpnt.       Anrl  ic  Ji-  menn*- *■'^  l^*:*  nooo*.*^^ 

that  this  claim  and  exercise  constitute  aright?  If  it 
is,  I  appeal  to  the  uniform,  unceasing  and  urgent  re- 
monstrances of  the  three  administrations — I  appeal 
iiot  only  to  the  warm  feelings,  but  cool  justice  of  tho 


f-*«M 


%B 


American  People— nay,  I  appeal  to  the  sound  sense 
and  hononrable  sentiment  ©f  the  British  nation  itself, 
which,  however,  it  may  have  submitted  at  home  to> 
this  practice,  never  would  tolerate  its  sanction  by  Iaw» 
against  the  assertion.  If  it  is  not,  how  can  it  be  affirnif 
ed  that  it  is  on  our  part  a  mere  pretence  ?  r 

But  the  first  merchant  of  the  United  States*  in  an- 
swer to  Mr.  Pickering's  late  enquiries  has   informed 
him  that  since  the  affair  of  the  Chesapeake  there  has 
been  no  cause  of  complaint-  that  he  could  not  find  a 
single  instance  where  they  had  taken  one  man  out.  of 
a  merchant  vessel.     Who  it  is,  that  enjoys  the  dignity 
of  first  merchant  of  the  United  States  we  are  not  in- 
formed.    But  if  he  had  applied  to  many  merchants  m 
Boston  as  respectable  as  any  in  the  United  States,  they 
could  have  told  hhn  of  a  valuable  vessel  and  qargo^ 
totally  lost  upon  the  coast  of  England,  late  in  August 
last,  and  solely  in  consequence  of  having  had  two  of 
lier  men,  native  Americans  taken  from  her  by  impress- 
ment,  two  months  after  the  affair  of  the  Chesapeake-. 
t  On  the  15th  of  October,  the  king  England  issued 
his  proclamation,  commanding  his  naval  officers,  to  im- 
press his  subjects  from  neutral  vessels.     This  proda- 
mation  is  represented  as  merely  **  requiring  the  return 
of  his  subjects,  the  seamen  especially,  from  foreign 
countries,"  and  then  *'  it  is  an  acknowledged  princi- 
ple that  every  nation  has  a  right  to  the  service  of  its 
subjects  in  time  of  war. ' '    Is  this.  Sir,  a  correct  state- 
ment either  of  the  Proclamation,  or  of  the  question  it 
mvolves  in  which  our  right  is  concerned  ?   The  kma 
of  England's  right  to  the  service   of  his  subjects  m 
tune  of  war  is  nothing  to  us.     The  question  is,  wlic- 
ther  he  hasanghtto  seize  ^^hem  forcibly  onboardof  our 
vessels  while  under  contract  of  service  to  our  citizens, 
withm  our  jurisdiction   upon  the  high  seas  9    And 
whether  he  has  a  right  expressly  to  command  his  na- 
val  othcers  so  to  seize  them— Is  this  an  acknowledged 
principle?  certainly  not,      Whr  then  h  th?-   Pro- 
clamation  described  as  founded  upon    unc'c^^ttited 
prmciplc  ?  and  why  is  the  command,  so  justly  oflfen. 
sive  to  us,  and  so  mischievous  as  it  might  then  have 
been  made  m  execution,  altogether  omitted  ^ 


16 


J 


M 


But  it  is  not  the  taking  of  British  subjects  from  our 
vessels,  it  is  the  taking  under  colour  of  that  pretence 
our  own,  native  American  citizens,  which  constitutes 
the  most  galling  aggravation  of  this  merciless  practice. 
Yet  even  this,  we  are  told  is  but  a  pretence— for  three 
reasons. 

1.  Because  the  number  of  citizens  thus  taken,  is 
small. 

2.  Because  it  arises  only  from  the  impossibility  of 
distinguishing  Englishmen  from  Americans. 

3.  Because,  such  impressed  American  citizens  arc 
delivered  up,  on  duly  authenticated  proof. 

1,  Small  and  great  in  point  of  numbers  are  relative 
terms.  To  suppose  that  the  native  Americans  form  a 
small  proportion  of  the  whole  number  impressed  is  a 
mistake — The  reverse  is  the  fact.  Examine  the  offi'- 
cial  returns  from  the  Department  of  State.  They  give 
the  names  of  between  four  and  five  thousand  men  im- 
pressed since  the  commencement  of  the  present  War. 
Of  which  number,  not  one  fifth  part  were  British  Sub- 
jects— The  number  of  naturalized  Americans  could 
not  amount  to  one  tenth, — I  hazard  litde  in  saying 
that  more  than  three  fourths  were  native  Americans. 
If  it  be  said  that  some  of  these  men,  though  appearing 
on  the  face  of  the  returns  American  Citizens,  were  re- 
ally British  subjects,  and  had  fraudulently  procured 
their  protections  ;  I  reply  that  this  number  must  be 
far  exceeded  by  the  cases  of  Citizens  impressed,  which 
never  reach  the  Department  of  State.  The  Ameri- 
can Consul  in  London  estimates  the  number  of  im- 
pressments duriqg  the  War  at  nearly  three  times  the 
amount  of  the  names  returned.  If  the  nature  of  the 
offence  be  considered  in  its  true  colours,  to  a  people 
having  a  just  sense  of  personal  liberty  and  security,  it 
is  in  every  single  instance,  of  a  malignity  not  inferior 
to  that  of  murder.  The  very  same  act,  when  commit- 
ted by  the  recruiting  officer  of  one  nation  within  the 
territories  of  anothei-,  is  by  the  universal  Law  and  u- 
sage  of  nations  punished  with  death.  Suppose  the 
crime  had  in  every  instance,  as  by  its  consequences  it 
has  been  in  manv.  deliberate  murder.     Would  it  an- 


rom  our 
pretence 
istitutes 
practice. 
For  three 

aken,  is 

)ility  of 

zens  ar€ 

relative 
s  form  a 
ised  is  a 
the  offi- 
hey  give 
Qcn  im- 
nt  War. 
ish  Sub- 
ns  could 
1  saying 
lericans. 
jpearing 
were  re- 
irocured 
[nust  be 
d,  which 
Ameri- 
ir  of  im- 
mes  the 
e  of  the 
a  people 
urity,  it 
inferior 
:ommit- 
ithin  the 
7  and  u- 
lose  the 
ences  it 
Id  it  an- 


17 

swer  or  silence  the  voice  of  our  complaints  to  be  told 
that  the  number  was  small  ? 

2.  The    impossibility   of   distinguishing   English 
from  American  seamen  is  not  the  only,  nor  even  the 
most  frequent  occasion  of  impressment.     Look  again 
into  the  returns  from  the  Department  of  State — you  will 
see  that  the  officers  take  our  men  without  pretending 
to  enquire  \yhcre  they  were  born  ;  sometimes  merely 
to  shew  their  animosity,  or  their  contempt  for  our 
country  ;  sometimes  from  the  wantonness  of  power. 
When  they  manifest  the  most  tender  regard  for  the 
neutral  rights  of  America,  they  lament  that  they  want 
the  men.     They  regret  the  necessity,  but  they  must 
have  their  complement.     When  we  complain  of  these 
enormities,  we  are  answered  that  the  acts  of  such  offi- 
cers  were  unauthorized  ;  that   the  commanders    of 
Men  of  War,  are  an  unruly  set  of  men,  for  whose  vio- 
lence their  own  Government  cannot  always  be  answer- 
able, that  enquiry  shall  be  made—A  Court  Martial 
is  sometimes  meritioned— And  the  issue  of  Whitby's 
Court  Martial  has  taught  us  what  relief  is  to  be  ex- 
pected from  that.     There  are  even  examples  I  am 
told,  when  such  officers  have  been  put  upon  the  yel- 
low list.     But  this  is  a  rare  exception — The  ordinary 
issue  when  the  act   is  disavowed,  is  the  promotion  of 
the  actor. 

3.  The  impressed  native  American  Citizens  how- 
ever, upon  duly  authenticated  proof  are  delivered  up. 
Indeed  !  how  unreasonable  then  were  complaint !  how 
cffisctual  a  remedy  for  the  wrong  !  an  American  ves- 
sel, bound  to  a  European  port,  has  two,  three  or  four 
native  Americans,  impressed  bv  a  British  Man  of 
War,  bound  to  the  East  or  West  Indies.  When  the 
American  Captain  arrives  at  his  port  of  destination  he 
makes  his  protest,  and  sends  it  to  the  nearest  Ameri- 
can Minister  or  Consul.  When  he  returns  home,  he 
transmits  the  duplicate  of  his  protest  to  the  Secretary 
of  State.  In  process  of  time, 'the  names  of  the  im'- 
pressedmcn,  and  of  the  Ship  into  which  they  have 
been  impressed,  are  received  by  the  Agent  in  Lon- 
don.    He  makes  his  demand  that  the  men  may  be 

C 


19 


delivered  up— The  Lords  of  the  Admiralty,  after  a 
reasonable  time  for  enquiry  and  advisement,  return  for 
answer,  that  the  Ship  is  on  a  foreign  Station,  and  their 
Lordships  can  therefore  take  no  further  steps  in  the 
matter — Or,  that  the  ship  has  been  taken,  and  that  the 
men  have  been  received  in  exchange  for  French  pris- 
oners— Or,  that  the  men  had  no  protections  (the  im- 
pressing officers  often  having  taken  them  from  the 
men) — Or,  that  the  men  were  probably  British  subjects. 
Or  that  they  have  entered,  and  taken  the  Bounty ; 
(to  which  the  officers  know  how  to  reduce  them.) 
Or  that  they  have  been  married^  or  settled  in  England. 
In  all  these  cases,  without  further  ceremony,  their  dis- 
charge is  refused.  Sometimes,  their  Lordships,  in  a 
vein  of  humour,  inform  the  agent  that  the  man  has 
been  discharged  as  unsermceable.  Sometimes,  in  a 
sterner  tone,  they  say  he  was  an  itnposter.  Or  per- 
haps by  way  of  consolation  to  his  relatives  and  friends, 
they  report  that  he  has  fallen  in  Battle,  against  nations 
in  Amity  with  his  Country.  Sometimes  ihey  cooly 
return  that  there  is  no  such  man  on  board  the  ship ; 
and  what  has  become  of  him,  the  agonies  of  a  wife  and 
children  in  his  native  land  may  be  left  to  conjecture. 
When  all  these  and  many  other  such  apologies  for 
refusal  fail,  the  native  American  seaman  is  discharg- 
ed— and  when  by  the  charitable  aid  of  his  Government 
he  has  found  his  way  home,  he  comes  to  be  informed, 
that  all  is  as  it  should  be — that  the  number  of  his  fel- 
low-suffierers  is  small — that  it  was  impossible  to  dis- 
tinguish him  from  an  Englishman — and  tliiit  he  was 
delivered  up,  on  duly  authenticated  proof . 

Enough,  of  this  disgusting  subject — I  cannot  stop 
to  calculate  how  many  of  these  wretched  victims  arc 
natives  of  Massachusetts,  and  how  many  natives  of 
Virginia — I  cannot  stop  to  solv«  that  knotty  question 
of  national  jurisprudence  whether  some  of  them  might 
not  possibly  be  slaves,  and  therefore  not  Citizens  of 
the  United  States — i  cannot  stay  to  account  for  the 
wonder,  why,  poor,  and  ignorant  and  friendless  as 
most  of  them  are,  the  voice  of  their  complaints  is  so 
seldom  heard  in  the  great  navigating  States.     I  ad- 


19 


mit  that  we  have  endured  this  cruel,  indignity,  through 
all  the  administrations  of  the  General  Government.— » 
I  acknowledge  that  Britain  claims  the  right  of  seizing 
her  subjects  in  our  merchant  vessels,  and  that  even  it 
we  could  acknowledge  it,  the  line  of  discrimination 
would  be  difficult  to  draw.  We  are  not  in  a  condi- 
tion to  maintain  this  right,  by  War,  and  as  the  Brit. 
ish  Government  have  been  more  than  once  on  the 
point  of  giving  it  up  of  their  own  accord,  I  would 
still  hope  for  the  day  when  returning  Justice  shall  in- 
duce them  to  abandon  it,  without  compulsion.  Her 
subjects  we  do  not  want.  The  degree  of  protection 
which  we  are  bound  to  extend  to  them,  cannot  equal  the 
claim  of  our  own  citizens.  1  would  subscribe  to  any 
compromise  of  this  contest,  consistant  with  the  rights  of 
sovereignty,  the  duties  of  humanity,  and  the  principles 
of  reciprocity  :  but  to  the  right  of  forcing  even  her  own 
subjects  out  of  our  merchant  vessels  on  the  liigh  seas 
I  never  can  assent. 

The  second  point  upon  which  Mr.  Pickering  defends 
the  pretentions  of  Great  Britain,  is  her  denial  to  neutral 
nations  of  the  right  of  prosecuting  with  her  enemies  and 
their  colonies,  any  commerce  from  which  they  are  ex- 
cluded in  time  of  peace.  His  statement  of  this  case 
adopts  the  British  doctrine,  as  sound.  The  rights  as  on 
the  question  of  impressment,  so  on  this,  it  surrenders  at 
discretion — and  it  is  equally  defective  in  point  of  fact. 

In  the  first  place,  the  claim  of  Great  Britain,  is  not  to 
*'  a  riglit  of  imposing  on  this  neuti'al  commerce  some 
limits  and  restraints'^ — but  of  interdicting  it  altogether, 
at  her  pleasure,  of  interdicting  it  without  a  moment's 
notice  to  neutrals,  after  solemn  decisions  of  her  courts 
of  aduiiralty,  and  formal  acknowledgments  of  her  minis^ 
ters,  that  it  is  a  lawful  trade — And,  on  such  a  sudden, 
unnotified  interdiction  of  pouncing  upon  all  neutral  com- 
merce navigating  upon  the  faith  of  her  decisions  and  ac- 
knowledgments, and  of  gorging  with  confiscation  the 
greediness  of  her  cruizers — This  is  the  right  claimed  by 
Britain — This  is  the  power  she  has  exercised — What 


Mr.  Pickering  calls  "  limits  anc' 
laxations  of  her  right. 


straints,'*  sb*:"  calls  re- 


20 

It  is  but  little  more  than  two  years,  since  this  question 
was  aj^ilatcd  botli   in   En.^'land  and  America,   with  as 
much  zeal,  energy  and  ability,   as  ever  was  displayed 
upon  any  question   of  national  Law.     The  Britiijh  side 
was  supported  by  Sir  William  Scott,  Mr.  Ward,  and 
the  author  uf  War  in  Disguise.     But   even  in  Britain 
their  doctrine  was  refuted  to  demonstration  by  the  Edin- 
burg  i-eviewers.     In  America,  the  rights  of  our  country 
were  maintained  by  numerous  writers  profoundly  skilled 
in  the  science  of  national  and 'maritime  Luav.     The  An- 
swer to  War  in  Disguise  was  ascribed  to  a  Gentleman 
\vhose  talents  are  universally  acknowledged,  and  who  by 
his  official  situations  had  been  required   thoroughly  to 
investigate  every  question   of  coniiict  bcUveen  neutral 
and  belligerent  rights  \\'hich  has  occurred  in  the  history 
of  modern  War.  Mr.  Gore  and  Mr.  Pirxkney,  our  two 
commissioners  at  London,  under  Mr.  Jay's  Treaty,  the 
former,  in  a  train  of  cool  and  conclusive  argument  ad- 
dressed to   Mr.  Madison,  the  latter  in  a  memorial  of 
splendid   eloquence  from  the   Merchants  of  Baltimore, 
supported  the  same  cause ;  memorials,  drawn  by  lawyers 
of  distinguished  eminence,  by  Merchants  of  the  highest 
character,  and  by  statesmen  of  long  experience  in  our 
national  councils  came  from  Salem,  from  Boston,  from 
New- Haven,  from  New- York  and  from  Philadelphia  to- 
gether with  remonstrances  to  the  same  efiect  from  New- 
buryport,  Newport,  Norfolk  and  Charleston.     Tl.i,  ac- 
cumulated mass  of  legal  learning,  of  commercial  infor- 
mation  and  of  national  sentiment  from  almost  every  in- 
habited spot  upon  our  shores,  and  from  one  extremity  of 
the  union  to  the  other,  confirmed  by  the  unansA\'ered  and 
unanswerable  memorial  of  Mr.  Munroe   to  the  British 
minister,  and  by  the  elaborate  research  and  irresistible 
reasoning  of  the  examination  of  the  British  doctrine,  was 
also  made  a  subject  of  full,  and  deliberate  discussion  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States.     A  committee  of  seven 
members  of  that  body,  after  three  weeks  of  arduous  in- 
vestigation, reported  three  Resolutions,  the  first  of  which 
was  in  these  words  "  Resolved  diat  the  capture  and  con- 
demnation, under  the  orders  of  the  British  government, 
and  adjudications  of  their  courts  of  admiralty  of  Ameri- 
can vessels  and  their  cargoes,  on  the  pretext  of  their  being 


21 


employed  in  a  trade  widi  the  enemies  of  Great  Britain, 
prohibited  in  time  of  peace,  is  an  unprovoked  aj^iijression 
upon  the  property  of  the  citizens  of  these  Unitecl  States, 
a  violation  of  their  neutral  rights,  and  an  ancroachmant 
upon  their  national  Independence.''^ 

On  the  13th  of  February,  1806,  the  question  upon 
the  adoption  of  this  Resolution,  was  taken  in  the  Sen- 
ate.  The  yeas  and  nays  were  required  ;  but  not  a 
solitary  nay  was  heard  in  answer.  It  was  adopted  by 
the  unanimous  voice  of  all  the  Senators  present.  They 
were  twenty-eight  in  number,  and  among  them  stands 
recorded  the  name  of  Mr.  Pickering. 

Let  us  remember  that  this  was  a  question  most  pe- 
culiarly  and  immediately  of  commercial,  and  not  agri. 
cultral  mtcTQst ;  that  it  arose  from  a  call,  loud,  energet- 
ic and  unanimous,  from  all  the  merchants  of  the  Unit- 
ed States  upon  Congress,  for  the  national  interposi- 
tion ;  that  many  of  the  memorials  invoked  all  the 
energy  of  the  Legislature,  and  pledged  the  lives  and 
properties  of  the  memorialists  in  support  of  any  mea- 
sures  which  Congress  might  deem  necessary  to  vin- 
dicate  those  rights.  Negotiation  was  particularly  re- 
commended from  Boston,  and  elsewhere— negotiation 
was  adopted— negotiation  has  failed— and  now  Mr. 
Pickering  tells  us  that  Great-Britain  has  claimed  and 
mamtahicdherri§->^?/  He  argues  that  her  claim  is 
just— and  is  not  sparing  of  censure  upon  those  who 
still  consider  it  as  a  serious  cause  of  complaint. 

But  there  was  one  point  of  view  in  which  the  Brit- 
ish  doctrine  on  this  question  was  then  only  consider- 
ed  incidentally  in  the  United  States— because  it  was 
not  deemed  material  for  the  discussion  of  our  rights. 
We  examined  it  chiefly  as  affecting  the  principles  as 
betvveen  a  belligerent  and  a  neutral  power.  But  in 
fact  it  was  an  infringement  of  the  rights  of  War,  as 
well  as  of  the  rights  of  Peace.  It  was  an  unjustifiable 
enlargement  of  the  sphere  of  hostile  operations.  The 
enemies  of  Great  Britain  had  by  the  universal  Law  of 
Nations  a  right  to  the  benefits  of  neutral  Commerce 
withm  their  dominions  (subject  to  the  exceptions  of 
actual  blockade  and  contraband)  as  well  as  neutral  na- 


22 


lions  had  a  right  to  trade  ^iih  them.  The  cxchision 
from  that  <;ommerce  by  this  new  principle  of  warfare 
which  Britain,  . "•  defiance  of  all  immemorial  national 
usages,  undertook  by  her  single  authority  to  establish, 
bui  t'H)  naturally  led  her  e,  '  mies  to  resort  to  new  and 
extraufdinary  principles,  by  which  in  their  turn  they 
might  retaliate  this  injury  upon  her.  The  pretence 
upon  which  Britain  in  the  first  instance  had  attempted 
to  colour  her  injustice,  was  a  miserable 7?c/io« — It  was 
an  argument  against  fact.  Her  reasoning  was,  that  a 
neutral  vessel  by  mere  admission  in  time  of  war,  into 
Ports  from  which  it  would  have  been  excluded  in 
time  of  peace,  became  thereby  deprived  of  its  national 
character,  and  ipso  facto  was  transformed  into  enemy's 
property. 

Such  was  the  basis  upon  which  arose  the  far  famed 
rule  of  the  war  of  1756 — Such  was  the  foundation  up- 
on which  Britain  claimed  and  maintained  this  supposed 
right  of  adding  that  new  instrument  of  desolation  to  the 
horrors  of  war — It  was  distressing  to  her  enemy — 
yes !  Had  she  adopted  the  practice  of  dealing  with 
them  in  poison — Had  Mr.  Fox  accepted  the  services 
of  the  man  who  offered  to  rid  him  of  the  French  Em- 
peror by  assassination,  and  had  the  attempt  succeeded, 
it  would  have  been  less  distressing  to  France  than 
this  rule  of  the  war  of  1756  ;  and  not  more  unjustifia- 
ble. Mr.  Fox  had  too  fair  a  mind  for  either,  but  his 
comprehensive  and  liberal  spirit  was  discaic'ed..  with 
the  Cabinet  which  he  had  formed. 

It  has  been  the  struggle  of  reason  ann  litniaaity, 
and  above  all  of  Christianity  for  two  thousand  years  to 
mitigate  the  rigours  of  that  scourge  of  human  kind, 
wr  •■-  It  is  now  the  struggle  of  Britain  to  aggravate 
tliei  Her  rule  of  the  war  of  1756,  in  itself  and  in  its 
cficf^^rb  wi's  fJiC  of  the  deadliest  poisons,  in  which  it 
was  |.o?  lb  .  for  her  'O  tinge  the  weapons  of  her  hostil- 
ity. 

In  itself  and  in  its  effects,  I  say — For  the  French 
decrees  of  Berlin  and  of  Milan.  The  Spanish  and 
Dutch  decrees  of  the  same  or  the  like  tenor,  and  her 
own  orders  of  January  and  November— these  alterna- 


23 

tions  of  licenced  pillage,  this  ^ager  cdmpetition  be- 
tween  her  and  her  enemies  for  the  honour  ot  giving  the 
last  stroke  to  the  vitals  of  maritime  neutrality,  all  are 
justly  attributable  to  her  assumption  and  exercise  of 
this  single  principle.  The  rule  of  the  War  of  1756 
was  the  root,  from  which  all  the  rest  are  but  suckers, 
still  at  every  shoot  growing  ranker  in  luxuriance. 

In  the  last  decrees  of  France  and  Spain,  her  own  in. 
genious  ilrtion  is  adopted  ;  and  under  them,  every  neu- 
tral  vv-ssel  that  submits  to  English  search,  has  been  car. 
ried  into  an  English  port,  or  paid  a  tax  to  the  English 
Government  is  declared  denationalized ^  that  is  to  have 
lost  her  national  character,  and  to  have  become  Eng- 
lish property.  This  is  cruel  in  execution  ;  absurd 
in  argument.  To  refute  it  were  folly,  for  to  the  un- 
derstanding of  a  child  it  refutes  itself.  But  it  is  the 
reasoning  of  British  Jurists.  It  is  the  simple  applica- 
tion to  the  circumstances  and  powers  of  France,  of 
the  rule  of  the  war  of  1756. 

I  am  not  the  apologist  of  France  and  Spain  ;  I  have 
no  national  partialities ;  no  national  attachments  but 
to  my  own  country.  I  shall  never  undertake  to  justify 
or  to  palliate  the  insults  or  injuries  of  any  foreign 
power  to  that  country  which  is  dearer  to  me  than  life. 
If  the  voice  of  Reason  and  of  Justice  could  be  heard 
by  France  and  Spain,  they  would  say— -you  have  done 
wrong  to  make  the  injustice  of  your  enemy  towards 
neutrals  the  measure  of  your  own.     If  she  chastises 

with  whips  do  not  you  chastise  with   Scorpions 

Whether  France  would  listen  to  this  language,  I  know 
not.  The  most  enormous  infractions  of  our  rights 
hitherto  committed  by  her,  have  been  more  in  menace 
than  in  accomplishment.  The  alarm  has  been  justly 
great  ;  the  anticipation  threatening  ;  but  the  amount 
of  actual  injury  small.  But  to  Britain,  what  can  we 
say  ?  If  we  attempt  to  raise  o"r  voices,  her  Minister 
has  declared  to  Mr.  Pinckney  that  she  will  not  hear, 
a  he  only  reason  she  assiguh  for  her  recent  orders  of 
Council  is,  that  France  proceeds  on  the  same  princi- 
ples. It  is  not  by  the  light  of  blazing  temples,  and 
amid  the  groans  of  women  and  children  perishing  in 
the  ruins  of  the  sanctuaries  of  domestic  habitation  at 


24 


Copenhagen,  that  we  can  expect  our  remonstrances 
against  this  course  of  proceeding  will  be  heard. 

Let  us  come  to  the  third  and  last  of  the  causes  of 
complaint,  which  are  represented  as  so  frivolous  and 
so  unfounded—'*  the  unfortunate  affair  of  the  Chesa- 
peake,»»  The  orders  of  Admiral  Berkley,  under  which 
this  outrage  was  committed,  have  been  disavowed  by 
his  Government.  General  professions  of  a  willingness 
to  make  reparation  for  it,  have  been  lavished  in  pro- 
fusion ;  and  we  are  now  instructed  to  take  these  pro- 
fessions for  endeavours  ;  to  believe  them  sincere,  be- 
cause  his  Britannic  Majesty  sent  us  a  special  envoy  ; 
and  to  cast  the  odium  of  defeating  these  endeavours 
upon  our  own  government. 

I  have  already  told  you,  that  I  am  not  one  of  those 
who  deem  suspicion  and  distrust,  in  the  highest  order 
of  political  virtues.  Baseless  suspicion  is,  in  my  esti- 
mation, a  vice,  as  pernicious  in  the  management  of 
public  affairs,  as  it  is  fatal  to  the  happiness  of  domestic 
life.  When,  therefore,  the  British  Minis  ers  have 
declared  their  disposition  to  make  ample  reparation 
for  an  injury  of  a  most  atrocious  character,  committed 
by  an  officer  of  high  rank,  and,  as  they  say,  utterly 
without  authority  I  should  most  readily  believe  them, 
were  their  professions  not  positively  contradicted  by- 
facts  of  more  powerful  eloquence  than  words. 

Have  such  facts  occurred  ?  I  will  not  again  allude  to 
the  circumstances  of  Mr.  Rose's  departure  upon  his 
mission  at  such  a  precise  point  of  time,  that  his  Com- 
mission and  the  orders  of  Council  of  llth  November, 
might  have  been  signed  with  the  same  penful  of  ink. 
The  subjects  were  not  immediately  connected  with 
each  other,  and  his  Majesty  did  not  chuse  to  associ- 
ate distinct  topics  of  negotiation.  The  attack  upon 
the  Chesapeake  was  disavowed ;  and  ample  reparation 
was  withheld  only,  because  with  the  demand  for  satis- 
faction upon  that  injury,  the  American  Government 
ruid  coupled  a  demand  for  the  cessation  of  others  ;  a- 
likc  in  kind,  but  of  minor  aggravation.  But  had  re- 
paration really  been  intended,  would  it  not  have  been 
offered,  not  in  vague  and  general  terms,  but  in  precise 
and  specific  proposals  ?  Were  any  such  made  ?  None. 


25 

But  it  is  said  Mr.  Munroe  was  restricted  from  negotia- 
ting upon  this   subject  apart ;  and  therefore  Mr.  Rose 
was  to   be  sent  to  Washington  ;    charged    with  this 
single  object  ;    and  without  authority   to  treat   upon 
or  even  to  discuss  any    other.      Mr.  Rose  arrives— 
The  Annerican  government  readily  determine  to  treat 
upon  the  Chesapeake  affair,  separately  from  aU  others; 
but  before  Mr.  Rose  sets  his  foot  on  shore^  in  pursuance 
of  a  pretension  made  before  by  Mr.  Canning,  he  con- 
nects  with  the  negotiation,  a  subject  far  more  distinct 
Irom  the  butchery  of  the  Chesapeake,  than  the  general 
impressment  of  our  seamen,   I  mean  the  Proclamation, 
interdicting  to  British  ships  of  war,  the  entrance  of  our 
harbours. 

The  great  obstacle  which  has  always  interfered  in  the 
adjustment  of  our  differences  with  Britain,  has  been  that 
she  would  not  acquiesce  in  the  only  principle  upon  which 
lair  negotiation  between  independent  nations  can  be  con- 
ducted, the  principle  of  reciprocity,  that  she  refuses  the 
application  to  us  of  the  claim  which  she  asserts  for  her- 
self. The  forcible  taking  of  men  from  an  American 
vessel,  was  an  essential  part  of  the  outrage  upon  the 
Chesapeake.  It  was  the  ostensible  purpose  for  which 
^at  act  of  war  unproclaimed,  was  committed  The 
rresident's  Proclamation  was  a  subsequent  act,  and  was 
avowedly  founded  upon  many  similar  aggressions,  of 
which  that  was  only  the  most  aggravated. 

If  then  Britain  could  with  any  colour  of  reason  claim 
that  the  general  question  of  impressment  should  be  laid 
out  of  the  case  altogether,  she  ought  upon  the  principle 
of  reciprocity  to  have  laid  equally  out  of  the  case,  the 
proclamation,  a  measure  so  easily  separable  from  it,  and 
m  Its  nature  merely  defensive.  When  therefore  she 
made  the  repeal  of  the  Proclamation  an  indispensible 
preliminary  to  all  discussion  upon  the  nature  and  extent 
of  that  reparation  which  she  had  offered,  she  refused  to 
treat  with  us  upon  the  footing  of  an  independent  power. 

Cc  "  "r"'*  "i","^"  """^'^  ^^  seii-aegraoation on  our  part, 
before  she  would  even  tell  us,  what  redress  she  would 
condescend  to  grant  for  a  great  and  acknowledged 
wrong.  This  was  a  condition  which  she  could  not  but 
ioiow  to  be  inadmissible,  and  is  of  itself  proof  nearly 


m 


p  IP 


<ionclU!iive  that  her  Cabinet  never  intended  to  make  for 
that  wrong  any  reparation  at  all. 

But  this  is  not  all— It  cannot  be  forgotten  that  when 
that  atrocious  deed  was  committed,  amidst  the  general 
burst  of  indignation  which  resounded  from  every  part  of 
this  Union,  there  were  among  us  a  small  number  of  per- 
sons, who  upon  the  oninion  that  Berkley's  orders  were 
authorized  by  his  Government,  undertook  to  justify 
them  in  their  fullest  extent — ^These  ideas  probably  first 
propagated  by  British  official  characters,  in  this  Country, 
were  persisted  in  until  the  disavowal  of  the  British  Gov- 
ernment took  away  the  necessity  for  persevering  in  them, 
and  gave  notice  where  the  next  position  was  to  be  taken. 
This  patriotic  reasoning  however  had  b^cn  so  satisfac- 
tory at  Halifax,  that  complimentary  letters  were  received 
from  Admiral  Berkley  himself  highly  approving  the 
spirit  iu  which  they  were  inculcated,  and  remarking  how 
easily  Peace^  between  the  United  States  and  Britain 
might  be  preserved,  if /to  measure  of  our  national  rights 
could  be  made  the  prevailing  standard  of  the  Country* 

When  the  news  arrived  in  England,  although  the  gen*, 
eral  sentiment  <A  the  nation  was  not  prepared  for  the  for- 
mal avowal  and  justification  of  this  unparalleled  aggres- 
sion, yet  there  were  not  wanting  persons  there,  ready  to 
tlaim  and  maintain  the  right  of  searching  national  ships 
for  deserters — It  was  said  at  the  time,  but  for  this  we 
must  of  course  rest  upon  the  credit  of  inofficial  authority 
to  have  been  made  a  serious  question  in  the  Cabinet 
Council ;  nor  was  its  determination  there  ascribed  to 
the  eloquence  of  the  gentleman  who  became  the  official 
organ  of  its  communication — Add  to  this  a  circum- 
stance, which  without  claiming  the  irrefragable  credence 
of  a  diplomatic  nc*e,  has  yet  its  weight  ui)on  the  com- 
mon sense  of  mankind  ;  that  in  all  the  daily  newspapers 
known  to  be  in  the  ministerial  interest,  Berkley  was  justi- 
fied and  applauded  in  every  variety  of  form  that  publica- 
tion could  assume,  excepting  only  that  of  official  Procla- 
mation.—The  only  part  of  his  orders  there  disapproved 
was  the  reciprocal  ofier  which  he  made  of  submitting  his 
own  ships  to  be  searched  in  return — that  was  very  un- 
equivocally disclaimed — The  ruffian  right  of  superior 
force,  was  the  solid  base  upon  which  the  claim  was  as- 


27 


o  make  (ov 

\  that  when 
the  general 
ery  part  of 
iberofper- 
trders  were 
to  justify 
abably  first 
IS  Country, 
ritish  Gov- 
ig  in  them, 

0  be  taken, 
so  satisfac- 
re  received 
roving  the 
arking  how 
md  Britain 
ional  rights 
e  Country* 
gh  the  gen*, 
for  the  for* 
led  aggres- 
e,  ready  to 
ionai  ships 
for  this  we 
il  authority 
he  Cabinet 
iscribed  to 
the  official 
a  circum- 
e  credence 

1  the  com- 
lewspapers 
Mvasjusti- 
at  publica- 
ial  Procla- 
s  approved 
mitting  his 
s  very  un- 
f  superior 
im  was  as- 


serted, and  so  familiar  w^a  this  argument  grpwn  to  the 
casuists  of  British  national  Jurisprudence,  that  the  right 
of  a  British  man  of  war  to  search  m  American  frigate, 
was  to  them  a  self-evidept  proof  against  the  right  of  the 
American  frigate  to  search  the  4*  itish  man  of  of  war. 
The  same  tone  has  been  constantly  kfpt  up,  until  oqr 
accounts  of  latest  date,  and  have  been  recently  further 
invigorated  by  a  very  explicit  call  for  war  with  the 
United  States,  which  they  contend  could  be  of  no  possir 
ble  injury  to  Britain,  and  which  they  urge  upon  the 
ministry  as  afibrding  them  an  excellent  opportunity  to 
accomplish  a  dismemberment  ^f  thi^  Umon.-^ThesQ 
sentiments  have  even  been  avowed  in  Parliament,  where 
the  noblemm  who  moved  the  address  of  die  house  of 
]Lords  in  answer  to  the  king's  speech,  declared  that  the 
right  of  searching  national  ships,  ought  to  be  maintained 
against  the  An>ericans,  and  disclaimed  only  wiUi  respect 
to  European  sovereigns. 

In  the  mean  time  Admiral  Berkley,  by  a  court  mar- 
tial of  his  own  subordinate  officers,  hung  one  of  the  nien 
taken  from  the  Chesapeake,  and  callied  his  name  Jenkiix 
Ratibrd.-^There  was,  according  to  the  answer  so  fre- 
quently given  by  the  Lords  of  tl^  Admiralty,  upon  ap. 
plications  for  the  discharge  of  impressed  Americans,  np 
such  man  on  board  the  ship.  The  man  thus  executed 
had  been  taken  froin  the  Chesapeake  by  the  name  of 
Wilson.  It  is  said  that  on  his  trial  he  was  identified  by 
one  or  two  witnesses  wl)o  knew  him,  and  that  before  he 
was  turned  off  he  confessed  bis  name  to  be  Ratford  and 
that  he  was  born  in  Enjgland-r-But  it  has  also  been  said 
that  Ratford  is  now  living  in  Pennsylvaniar-and  after 
the  character  which  the  disavowal  of  Admiral  Berkley's 
own  government  has  given  to  his  conduct,  what  confir 
dence  can  be  claimed  or  due  to  the  proceedings  of  a 
court  martial  of  his  associates  held  to  sanption.  his  pro-^ 
ceedings. — The  three  other  men  had  not  even  been  de- 
manded in  his  orders-rThey  were  taken  by  the  sole  au- 
thority of  the  British  searching  lieutenant,  after  the  sur- 
render of  the  Chesapeake. — I'here  was  not  the  shadow 
of  a  pretence  before  the  court  martial  that  they  were 
British  subjects,  or  born  in  any  of  the  British  dominions. 
Yet  by  this  court  njartial  they  were  sentenced  to  suffer 


28 

death.  They  were  reprieved  from  execution,  only  up. 
on  condition  of  renouncing  their  rights  as  Americans  by 
voluntary  service  in  the  king's  ships— They  have  never 
been  restored. — To  complete  the  catastrophe  with  which 
this  bloody  tragedy  was  concluded,  Admiral  Berkley 
himself  m  sanctioning  the  doom  of  these  men— thus  ob- 
tained—thus tried— and  thus  sentenced,  read  them  a 
grave  moral  lecture  on  the  enormity  of  their  crime,  in 
Its  tendency  to  provoke  a  war  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain. 

Yet  amidst  all  this  parade  of  disavowal  by  his  govern- 
ment— amidst  all  these  professions  of  readiness  to  make 
reparation,  not  a  single  mark  of  the  slightest  disapproba- 
^on  appears  ever  to  have  been  manifested  to  that  officer. 
His  instructions  were  executed  upon  the  Chesapeake  in 

June — Rumours  of  his  recall  have  been  circulated  here 

But  on  leaving  the  station  at  Halifax  in  December,  he 
received  a  complimentary  address  from  the  colonial  as- 
sembly, and  assured  them  in  answer,  that  he  had  no  of- 
ficial information  of  his  recall.— From  thence  he  went  to 
the  West  Indies ;  and  on  leaving  Bermuda  for  England 
in  February  was  addressed  again  by  that  colonial  gov- 
ernment, in  terms  of  high  panegyric  upon  his  energy, 
with  manifest  allusion  to  his  atchievement  upon  the 
ChesajDeake. 

Under  all  these  circumstances,  without  applying  any 
of  the  maxims  of  a  suspicious  policy  to  the  British  pro- 
fessions, I  may  still  be  permitted  to  believe  that  their 
ministry  never  seriously  intended  to  make  us  honourable 
reparation,  or  indeed  any  reparation  at  all  for  that  "  un. 
fortunate  affair. " 

It  is  impossible  for  any  man  to  form  an  accurate  idea 
of  the  British  policy  towards  the  United  States,  without 
taking  into  consideration  the  state  of  parties  in  that  gov- 
ernment i  and  the  views,  characters  and  opinions  of  the 
individuals  at  their  helm  of  State— A  liberal  and  a  hostile 
policy  towards  America,  are  among  the  strongest  marks 
<^/^"»^»n^tion  between  the  political  systems  of  the  rival 
statesiucn  of  that  kingdom — The  liberal  party  are  recon- 
ciled to  our  Independence  ;  and  though  extremely  tena- 
cious of  cveiy  right  of  their  own  country,  are  systemati- 
cally disposed  to  preserve /?«?flre  with  the  United  States. 


2d 


Their  opponents  harbour  sentiments  of  a  very  differenf 
description — Their  system  is  coercion — Their  object 
the  recovery  of  their  lost  dominion  in  North  America — 
This  party  now  stands  high  in  power — Although  Ad- 
miral Berkley  may  never  have  received  written  orders 
from  them  for  his  enterprize  upon  the  Chesapeake,  yet 
in  giving  his  instructions  to  the  squadron  at  Norfolk,  he 
knew  full  well  under  what  administration  he  was  acting. 
Every  measure  of  that  administration  towards  us  since 
that  time  has  been  directed  to  the  same  purpose — To 
break  down  the  spirit  of  our  national  Independence. 
Their  purpose,  as  far  as  it  can  be  collected  from  their 
acts,  is  to  force  us  into  war  with  them  or  with 
their  enemies  ;  to  leave  us  only  the  bitter  alternative  of 
their  vengeance  or  their  protection. 

Both  these  parties  are  no  doubt  willing,  that  we 
should  join  them  in  the  war  of  their  nation  against 
France  and  her  allies — The  late  administration  would 
have  drawn  us  into  it  by  treaty,  the  present  are  at- 
tempting it  by  compulsion.  The  former  would  have 
admitted  us  as  allies,  the  latter  will  have  us  no  other- 
wise than  as  colonists.  On  the  late  debates  in  Parlia- 
ment, the  lord  chancellor  freely  avowed  that  the  orders 
of  Council  of  1 1th.  November  were  intended  to  make 
America  at  last  sensible  of  the  policy  of  joining  Eng- 
land against  France. 

-  This  too,  Sir,  is  the  substantial  argument  of  Mr. 
Pickering's  letter. — The  suspicions  of  a  design  in  our 
own  administration  to  plunge  us  into  a  war  with  Britain, 
I  never  have  shared.  Our  administration  have  every 
interest  and  every  motive  that  can  influence  the  conduct 
of  man  to  deter  them  from  any  suclr  purpose.  Nor  have 
I  seen  any  thing  in  their  measures  bearing  the  slightest 
indication  of  it.  But  between  a  design  of  war  with  Eng- 
land, and  a  surrender  of  our  national  freedom  for  the 
sake  of  war  with  the  rest  of  Europe,  there  is  a  material 
difference.  This  is  the  policy  now  in  substance  recom- 
mended to  us,  and  for  which  the  interposition  of  the 
commercial  States  is  called.  For  this,  not  only  are  all 
the  outrages  of  Britain  to  be  forgotten,  but  the  very 

assertion  of  our  rights  is  to  be  branded  with  odium. 

Impressment — Neutral  trade — British  taxation — Every 


30 


ilmig  that  can  distinguish  a  state  of  national  freedom  from 
a  state  of  national  vassalage,  is  to  be  surrendered  at  dis- 
cretion. In  the  face  of  every  feet  we  are  told  to  believe 
every  profession — In  the  nw4st  of  every  indignity,  we  are 
pointed  to  British  protection  as  our  only  shield  against 
the  universal  conqueror.  Every  phantom  of  jealousy 
and  fear  is  avoked — The  image  of  France  with  a  scourge 
in  her  hand  is  impressed  into  the  service,  to  lash  us  into 
the  refuge  of  obedience  to  Britain— .insinuations  are 
even  made  that  if  Britain  "  with  her  thousand  ships  of 
war,"  has  not  destroyed  our  commerce,  it  has  been  ow- 
ing  to  her  indulgence,  and  we  are  almost  threatened  in 
her  name  with  the  "  destruction  of  our  fairest  cities." 

Not  one  act  of  hostility  to  Britain  has  been  committed 
by  us,  she  has  not  a  pretence  of  that  kind  to  alledge-^ 
But  if  she  will  wage  war  upon  us,  are  we  to  do  nothing 
in  our  own  defence  ?    If  she  issues  orders  of  universal 
plunder  upon  our  commerce,  are  we  not  to  withhold  it 
from  her  grasp  ?  Is  American  pillage  one  of  those  rights 
which  she  has  claimed  and  exsercised  until  we  are  fore- 
closed from  any  attempt  to  obstruct  its  collection  ?    for 
what  purpose  are  we  required  to  make  this  sacrifice  of 
every  thing  that  can  give  valour  to  the  name  of  freemen  ? 
this  abandonment  of  the  very  right  of  self-preservation  ? 
is  to  avoid  a  war  ? — Alas  !    Sir,  it  does  not  offer  even 
this  plausible  plea  for  pusillanimity — For,  as  submission 
would  make  us  to  all  substantial  purposes  British  colo- 
nics, her  enemies  would  unquestionably  treat  us  as  such, 
and  after  degrading  ourselves  into  voluntary   servitude 
to  escape  a  war  with  her,  we  should  incur  inevitable  war 
with  her  enemies,  and  be  doomed  to  share  the  destinies 
of  her  conflict  with  a  world  in  arms. 

Between  this  unqualified  submission,  and  offensive 
resistance  against  the  war  upon  maritime  neutrality  wag- 
ed by  the  concurring  decrees  of  all  ihe  belligerent  pow- 
ers, the  Embargo  was  adopted,  and  has  been  hitherto 
continued.  So  far  was  it  from  being  dictated  by  France, 
that  it  was  calculated  to  withdraw,  and  has  withdrawn 


—  U 


from  Witiim  ner  reach  all  the  means  of  compulsion  which, 
her  subsequent  decrees  would  have  put  in  her  posses^ 
sion.  It  has  added  to  the  motives  both  of  France  and 
England,  for  preserving  peace  with  us,  and  has  diminish- 


ed  their  induceinents  to  war.  It  has  lessened  their  ca- 
pacities of  inflicting  injury  upon  us,  and  given  us  some 
preparation  for  resistance  to  them — It  has  taken  from 
their  violence  the  lure  of  interest — It  has  dashed  the 
philter  of  pillage  from  the  lips  of  rapine.  That  it  is  dis- 
tressing to  ourselves — that  it  calls  for  the  fortitude  of  a 
people,  determined  to  maintain  their  rights,  is  not  to  be 
denied.  But  the  only  alternative  was  between  that  aixi 
war.  Whether  it  will  yet  save  us  from  that  calamity, 
cannot  be  determined,  but  if  not,  it  will  prepare  us  for 
the  further  struggle  to  which  we  may  be  called.  Its 
double  tendency  of  promoting  peace  and  preparing  for 
War,  in  its  operation  upon  both  the  belligerent  rivals,  is 
the  great  advantage,  which  more  than  outweigh  all  its 
evils. 

If  any  statesman  can  point  out  another  alternative,  I 
am  ready  to  hear  him,  and  for  any  practicable  ex- 
pedient to  lend  him  every  possible  assistance.  But 
fet  not  that  expedient  be,  submission  to  trade  under 
British  licences,  and  British  taxation.  We  are  told  that 
even  under  these  restrictions  we  may  yet  trade  to  the 
British  dominions  to  Africa  and  China,  and  with  the  col- 
onies of  France,  Spain,  and  Holland  I  ask  not  how  much 
of  this  trade  would  be  left,  when  our  intercourse  with 
the  whole  continent  of  Europe  being  cut  off  would  leave 
us  no  means  to  purchase,  and  no  market  for  sale  ? — I 
ask  not,  what  trade  we  could  enjoy  with  the  colonies  of 
nations  with  which  we  should  be  at  war  ?  I  ask  not 
how  long  Britain  would  leave  open  to  us  avenues  of 
trade,  which  even  in  these  very  orders  of  Council,  she 
boasts  of  leaving  open  as  a  special  indulgence  ?  If  we 
yield  the  principle  we  abandon  all  pretence  to  national 
sovereignty — To  yearn  for  the  fragments  of  trade  which 
might  be  left,  would  be  to  pine  for  the  crumbs  of  com- 
mcrcial  servitude — The  boon  which  we  should  humili- 
ate ourselves  to  accept  from  British  bounty  wouW  soon 
be  withdrawn.  Submission  never  yet  sat  boundaries  to 
encroachment.  From  pieadhig  for  half  tiie  empire  we 
should  sink  into  supplicants  for  life — We  should  sup- 
plicate in  vain.  If  we  must  fall,  let  us  fall,  freemen — If 
we  must  perish,  let  it  be  in  defence  of  our  Rights. 


32 

To  conclude,  Sir,  I  am  not  sensible  of  any  necessity 
for  the  extraordinary  interference   of  the  commercial 
states,  to  controul  the  general  Councils  of  the  nation.— 
If  any  mterference  could  at  this  critical  extremity  of  our 
affairs  have  a  kindly  effect  upon  our  common  welfare,  it 
would  be  interference  to  promote  union  and  not  a  divi- 
sion— -to  urge  mutual  confidence,  and  not  univerisal  dis- 
trust—to strengthen  the  arm  and  not  to  relax  the  sinews 
of  the  nation.     Our  suffering  and  our  dangers,  though 
diflenng  perhaps  in  degree,  are  universal  in  extent— 
As  thcL-  causes  are  justly  chargeable,  so  their  xemoval 
IS  dependent  not  upon  ourselves,  but  upon  others.     But 
\vhilethe  spirit  of  Independence  shall  continue  to  beat 
in  unison  with  the  pulses  of  the  nation,  no  danger  will 
be  truly  formidable— Our  duties  are,  to  prepare  with 
concerted  energy,  for  those  which  threaten  us,  to  meet 
them  without  dismay,  and  to  rely  for  their  issue  upon 
Heaven.  * 

I  am,  with  great  respect  and  attachment, 

Dear  Sir,  your  friend  and  humble  servant, 

JOHN  QUINCY  ADAM& 


Hon.  Harmon  Qrat/  Otis. 


necessity 
)mniercial 
nation. — 
lity  of  our 
welfare,  it 
lot  a  divi- 
ersal  dis- 
lic  sinevv^s 
3,  though 
extent. — 
'  lemoval 
Ts.     But 
le  to  beat 
nger  will 
lare  with 

to  meet 
me  upon 


irvant, 
DAMS. 


